Q. Is there any discussion of settlement programs in the Eastern European countries suffering huge out-migrations and population losses, like Bulgaria and Romania, where the younger generation has left for the West? — Dardis McNamee, Vienna

A. The question arose soon after the migrants began arriving in Europe in large numbers: Why don’t the countries in Europe suffering debilitating population losses, many of them former communist states in the financially struggling East, make up for it by welcoming and resettling new migrants from Syria and elsewhere?

Several forces quickly stalled any such discussions:

• Officials in many of the countries, including Bulgaria and Hungary, insisted that their economies were so anemic, their unemployment rates so high that any fresh arrivals would be more likely to end up on the public dole than bolstering a sagging economy.

• Public opinion throughout the region has been steadfastly against welcoming large numbers of migrants, with some residents arguing that the newcomers’ customs and Muslim religion would transform their own national cultures in ways they don’t want. Others said that the migrants would sap precious national resources needed to care for the region’s own poor population.

• Political leaders in the region have been more likely to exploit the crisis to foster nationalist and sometimes xenophobic attitudes than use it as an opportunity to diversify their nations. The countries are much more focused on keeping their young people at home, and convincing those who have already left to return.

Ask Us Your Questions About the Refugee Crisis in Europe

What would you like to know about the refugee crisis in Europe? *

You have 250 characters left.

Continue

Name *

City and State *

Email *

Facebook, Twitter or Instagram handle

By submitting to us, you are promising that the content is original, doesn’t plagiarize from anyone or infringe a copyright or trademark, doesn’t violate anybody’s rights and isn’t libelous or otherwise unlawful or misleading. You are agreeing that we can use your submission in all manner and media of The New York Times and that we shall have the right to authorize third parties to do so. And you agree to the rules of our Member Agreement, found online at our website.

Thank you for your submission.

RICK LYMAN

Q. How are Europeans and other prosperous countries going to prevent refugee status from being extended to virtually all labor migrants, including West Africans, East Africans, Afghans and Pakistanis?

A. To receive asylum, a migrant must show “a well-founded fear of persecution” in the country he or she fled on the basis of religion, race, ethnicity, political conviction or membership in a social group. If that person is coming from a war zone like Syria, it can be easier to make that case.

An error has occurred. Please try again later.

You are already subscribed to this email.

These standards were first established in the 1951 United Nations Convention on the Status of Refugees, which nearly all countries in Europe have signed.

Asylum seekers are entitled to a full and fair hearing, no matter where they come from, and their claims should not be rejected in what the United Nations recently called “summary proceedings.”

If a migrant can’t establish his or her claim for asylum, he or she could be deported. There are migrants looking for better jobs, more promising economic opportunities or generous public benefits in Europe. They can be denied asylum, and if they come from a country that is on the official list of “safe countries,” it is almost certain they will be.

They can also be denied asylum and lose protected status as refugees if they are found to have committed war crimes or crimes against humanity.

One way to stop deportation even if asylum has been denied is for the asylum seeker to show that she or he has a medical condition that cannot be treated at home.

Get news and analysis from Europe and around the world delivered to your inbox every day with the Today’s Headlines: European Morning newsletter. Sign up here.